Chennai ITAT directed the grant of charitable registration u/s 10(23C)(iv) to a trade promotion body, holding its activities as public utility, citing binding precedents on ITPO’s identical case.
A summary of ITAT Chennai’s order in Shanmugasundaram Venkatachalapathy Vs ITO, which sustained both unexplained investment under Section 69 and professional receipts found via Form 26AS but not declared in income tax return.
Chennai ITAT cancelled the penalty u/s 270A on Redington’s Singapore subsidiary, holding that the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) was a debatable issue settled via MAP, not under-reported income.
Chennai ITAT ruled that surplus from land sold after 20+ years was Capital Gain, not business income, as sporadic transactions and long holding period negated intent to trade.
Chennai ITAT deleted a Rs.12.36 lakh cash deposit addition under Section 69A for a retired government employee, acknowledging retirement benefits and customary household savings as sufficient sources.
ITAT Chandigarh held that disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act set aside since own funds and reserves of the assessee are more than sufficient to cover the investment made during the year. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Chandigarh held that execution of Joint Development Agreement [JDA] doesn’t constitute transfer of capital asset which would result in earning of capital gain. Accordingly, addition is deleted and appeal is allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that assessment order passed by AO in old PAN cannot be survived if transactions reported by DGFT in old PAN is already reported by assessee in new PAN. Accordingly, matter restored back to re-verify.
ITAT Delhi held that since nature of expense i.e. purchase and source of expense not doubted and only genuineness of expense is doubted, the disallowance has to be made under section 37 of the Income Tax Act and not under section 69C. Accordingly, order of PCIT set aside.
ITAT Rajkot’s ruling in Milind Pankajbhai Shroff vs. PCIT confirms the Principal Commissioner’s authority under Section 263 to revise an assessment where the AO failed to inquire into a ₹30 Lakh deduction claimed for bogus political donations,
